Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (88377)	4/1/2001 1:37:15 AM
From: KeepItSimple	Respond to of 436258

>how to measure? The answer is of course, you can't measure it. The ONLY reason it is "measured" is so the government can use the "results" to cheat retirees out of cost of living increases. The data has absolutely no value to a non-central-planning-form of government. NONE. Recently china admitted that they had been 100% lying about their productivity numbers for the last 30 years. It is perfectly clear that our government does the exact same thing China admitted to, except ours hasn't admitted it yet. Greenspan publicly stated on the record that the fed no longer pays ANY attention whatsoever to ANY data that comes out of the BLS. He literally said that. His reasoning was that the data was computed under political influence and basically forged each and every time. Core CPI was inveted in the 70's in order to filter out everything that was going up, to try and keep government handouts low while inflation was raging. Look how well that worked.

To: Ilaine who wrote (88377)	4/1/2001 1:37:15 AM
From: KeepItSimple	Respond to of 436258

>how to measure? The answer is of course, you can't measure it. The ONLY reason it is "measured" is so the government can use the "results" to cheat retirees out of cost of living increases. The data has absolutely no value to a non-central-planning-form of government. NONE. Recently china admitted that they had been 100% lying about their productivity numbers for the last 30 years. It is perfectly clear that our government does the exact same thing China admitted to, except ours hasn't admitted it yet. Greenspan publicly stated on the record that the fed no longer pays ANY attention whatsoever to ANY data that comes out of the BLS. He literally said that. His reasoning was that the data was computed under political influence and basically forged each and every time. Core CPI was inveted in the 70's in order to filter out everything that was going up, to try and keep government handouts low while inflation was raging. Look how well that worked.

To: Ilaine who wrote (88377)	4/1/2001 1:42:16 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

>>The difference between a $5 shirt and a $20 shirt isn't that great, IMO.<< cb, in a micro sense, your opinion matters as does mine. however, on a macro sense neither our opinions matter, by definition. the market says their is a $15 difference. that is all that matters on a macro level. perhaps the $5 shirt suffers from unproductive pricing? perhaps not. it is not our place to judge. if the difference isn't that much then the cheap shirts would sell for the same as the expensive shirts. the bottom line is the market interprets a huge difference and the price reflects this market difference. i never thought gdp was supposed to measure what people buy. it doesn't care what output is, just that it is economic output. >>If medical technology increases people's lives, so they don't die and continue to consume but don't produce, how to measure?<< i assume the goods they consume cost money. that money spent is counted toward gdp. >>? If babies don't die in infancy and mothers don't die in childbirth, how to measure?<< again the products they purchase that they wouldn't otherwise have purchased would be picked up in gdp, as well as any revenues they helped to produce. >>If Dick Cheney has a procedure and stays on as Vice President, how to measure?<< i don't see that gdp should care who does what or how, it just cares when output is affected. if joe6pack became vp and cheney took joe6pack's spot (and nothing else changed), then gdp would remain unchanged, as it should. gdp is interested in actions and their economic consequences and not the personalities behind them. it doesn't care whether the game winner was shot by michael jordan or pee wee herman, just that the points count. gdp wasn't designed to give warm fuzzy feelings and to make people feel important. parents, sibblings and spouses are for that ;-) it is a bottom line economic output for the nation. well, it used to be. now it is economic output + whatever alan greenspan decides on a whim to add to it. now it means much less than before unless you can back out alan's nonsense. but, i bet not one in 1000 folks know anything about what alan geenspan did to fabricate the "productivity miracle" and use it as the foundation for a "new economy" that gravely influence people's actions for the long term worse of the nation. houses built on sand can't withstand the storm of reality and fact when it hits. btw, if you want to know how many shirts were sold in the us, i'm sure some trade oranization supplies that data. such data can be used in conjunction with gdp, it just shouldn't be gdp.